In a recent lengthy article in Inside Story, Brett Evans discusses a credible Teal threat to the Liberals in Sydney’s Bradfield seat and raises the question: would minority government be so bad?
A similar question could be raised in the seat of Cowper where the challenge is from the Independent Caz Heise, who came close to taking the seat in 2022, assisted by strong ALP preferences. The seat is held by the National Party MP, Pat Conaghan. Heise, a former local nurse, reportedly receives financial support from the Simon Holmes a Court group. Her election could well contribute to a minority ALP Government election. Would that be so bad? Not for her and the Albanese Government and quite possibly not for the Cowper seat either. But in more general terms what might be the problem with minority Government and, still more, where does the minority government concept come from?
It is plainly part of the two-party system of government which is the result of the single-member electoral system inherited from the UK. Most Australians do not realise this, even though the criticism of the two-party system is growing here significantly. Remarkably, a major campaign is now in progress in the UK, supported strongly even by Conservatives, to end that very system. In electoral systems based on proportional representation, some 90 in total, the concept of “minority government” is simply not known. The reason for that is that after every election, the search is on for a majority government coalition between larger and smaller parties. Evans’ article does not really consider this aspect of the “minor party government”.
Before answering the question “would minority government be so bad?” we might wonder why the principal cause could be the emergence of the Teal Independents.
The principal reason for that would seem to be that the chances for women who aspire to become politicians in the Liberal Party has long been inadequate. Especially those women who had the obvious qualifications to progress in that party and were not attracted to try. This attitude has changed in recent years, following the success of the Teals. The ALP was quick to guarantee 50% of parliamentary seats for women to secure. No doubt, many of the women who aspire to contest elections as independents were not actually members of the Liberal Party but realised their chances of success were slim mainly due to former male domination. At the same time, they also did not feel attracted to the other major party. The absence of other significantly strong parties clearly made the option of campaigning as an independent attractive and proved remarkably successful when financial support became available.
So, given the still continuing two-party system, is “minority government” so bad”? Probably not in the short term. However, the major party that manages to gain the most seats and can work with the Teals — and the Greens — is more likely to form government after the May election. Is it conceivable that the Teal contingent will grow still further or is this an interlude towards major electoral change? This is the crucial issue perhaps.
A related major issue would be: what are the main responsibilities of the independents? This could vary considerably for each but they would want to do well for their single-member district, and be re-elected. This would mean that major federal government policy for the nation as a whole may be of less urgency than is desirable. That is where serious problems would most likely emerge for minority government as a type of government that has developed from the failure of the two-party system. The lack of preparedness by the major parties to consider a proportional system is understandable, but this is actually a form of dangerous conservatism. Even in the campaign for the 2025 federal election, the daily adversarial polarisation of policy presentation never seems to stop.
In the 2024 book A Better Australia by Brumby, Hamilton and Kells, the adversarial character of Australian politics is deplored and rejected as unhelpful for the country’s future. In this important book, serious attempts are discussed made by the several contributors to find bipartisan solutions on law and order. People like Tony Windsor, former Greens leader Christine Milne and former Liberal Party leader John Hewson concentrate on bipartisan policy promotion where possible and reject the endless tendency towards polarisation. Milne has come out in a later publication by the Australia Institute in favour of proportional representation as the obvious way forward. Remarkably, while the contributions by the positive Teals are given much attention the book fails to suggest a change towards a proportional representation system. Windsor talked about the need for participatory democracy processes. This is rare in all Australian Parliaments and it is even more rare in industrial and business organisations where adversity, strikes and union activity are part of the same tradition. Surely Australia can move away from this culture.
However, the question is who and which organisations will initiate the movement towards a major change in attitudes? Proportional representation does not lead to “minority government”. It leads to genuine majority government negotiated after the election. If the major parties are incapable of transforming themselves, another party should step in and get the ball rolling. Obviously, the Greens are the party that stands to win most of all. Their current support would result in around 20 seats in a proportional system. But, amazingly, although this is their formal policy for some strange reason the Greens are not campaigning on it. Can anyone explain this?
Klaas Woldring is a retired A/Prof of Southern Cross University and was active in the ALP in the 1980s, when he twice stood for the federal seat of Richmond, based on Lismore.